On Sat, 30 Sep 2017 12:36:12 +0200 Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, 30 Sep 2017 11:20:02 +0200 > Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 07:06:18PM +0300, Kirill Tkhai wrote: > > > Similar to __down_write_killable(), and read killable primitive. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > arch/s390/include/asm/rwsem.h | 18 ++++++++++++++++-- > > > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/rwsem.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/rwsem.h > > > > FWIW, while looking into this patch I realized that we never optimized our > > rwsem primitives to make use of new atomic instructions. > > > > The generic rwsem header file however does, since it uses atomic ops which > > we did optimize. Even when compiling for old machines the generic version > > generates better code. Therefore I will remove the 15 years old s390 > > implementation and switch to the generic version instead. > > Take care not to conflict with the queued spinlock/rwlock patches on the > features branch. > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/s390/linux.git/commit/?h=features&id=eb3b7b848fb3dd00f7a57d633d4ae4d194aa7865 > > Me thinks that what you have in mind is already done. Argh, pitfall rwlock != rwsem. Using the atomic_ops for the rwsem code makes a lot of sense. Yes, please.. -- blue skies, Martin. "Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-s390" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
